Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
PuppetSoul wrote: You shouldn't be using Sisters as backfield objective campers, because they don't have long range weapons to make them relevant. For a similar price you can take scouts with snipers.
"I looked, but I sure don't see any scouts with snipers in the sister's dex." -Everyone in this channel trying to make mono sisters work
MacPhail wrote: Your opponent easily deletes one or more of these in the shooting phase to make a hole for their deep strikers on Turn 2. A 1 in 6 chance for 5 models means somebody probably stands back up, and you could even add another with an AoF on your turn. At worst you force your opponent to allocate another unit's shooting, and at best you buy yourself an extra turn with a secured backfield.
Valorous heart doesn't stand people back up, it's just feel no pain. It means that the minimum firepower required to remove the unit is a little higher but sufficient overkill with still kill them all.
So I think on a conceptual level, one of the useful things about sisters in the meta is that they have a very efficient level of durability as massed infantry as compared to their ability to kill other massed infantry.
With very few exceptions (...basically the aforementioned punishers), almost nothing vehicle/monster mounted can really deal efficiently with loads of 3+ bodies, and even less so loads of 3+/4++ bodies at the costs sisters bring them. Meanwhile, massed 3+ BS bolters and stormbolters at the price point sisters bring them are very well suited to deal with most kinds of infantry models.
I think the way this works in my mind is the strongest builds probably rely on ignoring enemy vehicles, including knights, because with very few exceptions they don't deal well with shooting at sisters. You instead focus on wiping out their troops and controlling the board. Sure, sisters troops can't dent a castelian, but I doubt a castelian could hope to even get half its points back shooting at 3+/4++ infantry models all game. And if he isn't presented with any other targets, he's kind of a waste of space.
Your best "backfield objective camper" is probably retributors with heavy bolters. They'll be hanging back anyway.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Jancoran wrote: Last thought: Sisters of Battle in general are currently suffering their worst Codex,
Blackbook 3rd and Codex WD 2011 were both worse than this. Heck, I'd say 6th ed C:AS was worse off than this even.
I never had a problem winning with the Witch Hunters codex. White Dwarf Codex also won me a few events.
No. I haven't been frustrated enough to be negative about a Sisters codex before and I've played them all extensively and successfully. I can only speak for myself on the way I found to use each one but this newest one vexes me something fierce.
Blackbook 3rd is not WH codex.
3rd Edition (black book) - 11 Units - 11 without SC
Inquisition 3 Characters (Inquisitor, Inq Lord, 4x Assassins) 3 Units (Retinue, IST, DCA) 3 Vehicles (Chimera, Land Raider, Orbital) 1 SC (Karamazov)
Also, I'm not saying you weren't successful, I'm just saying that those two books (Blackbook 3rd and C:WD 2011) were objectively worse with fewer options than this codex.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote: Your best "backfield objective camper" is probably retributors with heavy bolters. They'll be hanging back anyway.
And Exos, yeah. I was noodling a 3 Ret, 3 Exo list a few pages back that I still want to try.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/02/28 18:31:28
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
I have had zero luck with exorcists this edition. Randomized numbers of shots needs weight of fire to even out the averages (like how Orks do it), and exos can't really deliver that.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Likewise, the new Beta Bolter rule combined with the formation causes even a single set of Intercessors to rip through multiple squads of girls each turn at 30", so massed 3+/4++ does effectively nothing when the meta is built around 2+/3++ being the new standard for elites.
what do you mean by "the formation"
//edit, oh the specialist detachment for incessors
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/02/28 19:11:36
Godforge custom 3d printing / professional level casting masters and design:
https://www.etsy.com/shop/GodForge
Likewise, the new Beta Bolter rule combined with the formation causes even a single set of Intercessors to rip through multiple squads of girls each turn at 30", so massed 3+/4++ does effectively nothing when the meta is built around 2+/3++ being the new standard for elites.
what do you mean by "the formation"
There's a vigilus formation for Intercessors that pairs well with beta bolters.
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
MacPhail wrote: Your opponent easily deletes one or more of these in the shooting phase to make a hole for their deep strikers on Turn 2. A 1 in 6 chance for 5 models means somebody probably stands back up, and you could even add another with an AoF on your turn. At worst you force your opponent to allocate another unit's shooting, and at best you buy yourself an extra turn with a secured backfield.
Valorous heart doesn't stand people back up, it's just feel no pain. It means that the minimum firepower required to remove the unit is a little higher but sufficient overkill with still kill them all.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong... do you check FNP per wound suffered or per model lost? In my mind, you take a hit, fail a save, suffer a wound, and then try to ignore it with FNP. One wound models can only suffer one wound, so there's just one to ignore, and only mortal wounds spill onto other models in the unit... where am I going wrong?
MacPhail wrote: Your opponent easily deletes one or more of these in the shooting phase to make a hole for their deep strikers on Turn 2. A 1 in 6 chance for 5 models means somebody probably stands back up, and you could even add another with an AoF on your turn. At worst you force your opponent to allocate another unit's shooting, and at best you buy yourself an extra turn with a secured backfield.
Valorous heart doesn't stand people back up, it's just feel no pain. It means that the minimum firepower required to remove the unit is a little higher but sufficient overkill with still kill them all.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong... do you check FNP per wound suffered or per model lost? In my mind, you take a hit, fail a save, suffer a wound, and then try to ignore it with FNP. One wound models can only suffer one wound, so there's just one to ignore, and only mortal wounds spill onto other models in the unit... where am I going wrong?
It's per damage. Get shot with 1 lascannon and you may have to roll 6 FNP rolls. I ran the FNP conviction for several games and it changed nothing. Most squads are killed by over kill. Great! I save 2 wounds to FNP, but the other 8 wounds still went thru on my 5 girls. They're wiped anyway.
drakerocket wrote: So I think on a conceptual level, one of the useful things about sisters in the meta is that they have a very efficient level of durability as massed infantry as compared to their ability to kill other massed infantry.
With very few exceptions (...basically the aforementioned punishers), almost nothing vehicle/monster mounted can really deal efficiently with loads of 3+ bodies, and even less so loads of 3+/4++ bodies at the costs sisters bring them. Meanwhile, massed 3+ BS bolters and stormbolters at the price point sisters bring them are very well suited to deal with most kinds of infantry models.
I think the way this works in my mind is the strongest builds probably rely on ignoring enemy vehicles, including knights, because with very few exceptions they don't deal well with shooting at sisters. You instead focus on wiping out their troops and controlling the board. Sure, sisters troops can't dent a castelian, but I doubt a castelian could hope to even get half its points back shooting at 3+/4++ infantry models all game. And if he isn't presented with any other targets, he's kind of a waste of space.
This was the concept of TPT, but the problem is that the Beta Bolter rule makes that not the case anymore: outside of 12", marines spit out twice your firepower. Intercessors spit out four-times more, with AP, and are still not twice your cost. It's not until you get to Deathwatch that you hit twice a BSS' cost, but then you're looking at a guy with four-times your shots, SIA, and T4 2+/3++ statline.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/28 21:10:54
Mmmpi wrote: So, four rounds on average to wipe out an all SB, MSU style force using just leman russ.
Here's the conditions I ran my tests under.
- 1 Cadian Battalion with 3 Tank Commanders, 3 Scions, 3 HS Russes
- 1 Cadian Supreme Command detachment with 3 Tank COmmanders
- All 9 Russes had Battlecannons and HB sponsons.
- Overall list cost: 1902pts. I didn't use the Scions so we'll subtract their cost from the calculations: overall the tanks cost 1767pts.
- Tanks had an Aquila and 20 CP.
- I assumed every shooting attack the Russes made was in range.
- The table had zero LoS-blocking terrain and one small patch of trees in each deployment zone, sufficient to fit two squads and two Characters. Most of the Sisters force had no cover.
- ITC Champion's Mission rules using "Seize Ground" objective placement.
- Sisters had only the resources listed in my earlier reply (1213pts of Sisters, 11 FP, 20CP).
Under those conditions round 4 was the quickest I managed to table my 1213pts of Sisters with 1767pts of Leman Russes - and that was with the Russes remaining stationary at all times. Doing so maximised firepower but allowed the Sisters to keep pace with the tanks on Primaries; the tanks were killing a lot of Sisters with no damage coming back, but the Sisters were controlling at least 3 objectives every turn. If the tanks hand't tabled the Sisters it would've been a draw on Primaries.
Moving the tanks allowed them to outpace the Sisters on the Primary, but meant far fewer Sisters were dying every turn. It alst left the tanks open to return fire - on average the Sisters were claiming one wound for every 10 or 15 shots they fired - Divine Guidance/ Vessels blob with Canoness buffs was hitting on 2+ and rerolling 1s, guaranteeing a tonne of hits, and if playing GSC teaches you anything it's that fishing for 6s isn't "fishing" if you're rolling half a tonne of dice every turn.
The Retributors did much better than the Stormbolters, taking 2 wounds per 8 shots on average. If I had to play against this kind of army for-reals with my Sisters I'd probably stick the Book Canoness in my Retributor blob so their HBs get Guidance/ Vessels and RR1H, and just have the Stormbolters run around in midfield causing a nuisance.
That was my first thought anyway, until I realised that if I ever *was* playing my Sisters against such an army for-reals I would have another 500pts to spend, which would mean Celestine, at least 1 Dialogus, and a Knight Paladin or something similarly nasty to take down the Russes with. There'd also be LoS blocking terrain and far more opportunities to claim cover.
What I'm now wondering is how a mech Sisters army would cope under the same conditions. If I get time over the weekend I'll run a few more test games and let you know.
That was my first thought anyway, until I realised that if I ever *was* playing my Sisters against such an army for-reals I would have another 500pts to spend, which would mean Celestine, at least 1 Dialogus, and a Knight Paladin or something similarly nasty to take down the Russes with. There'd also be LoS blocking terrain and far more opportunities to claim cover.
What I'm now wondering is how a mech Sisters army would cope under the same conditions. If I get time over the weekend I'll run a few more test games and let you know.
It goes from wounding on 2s to wounding on 5s, but the returning fire is cut in half, can't use Guidance/Vessels/Blessed Bolts, and the transports never achieve a 2+ except on the first turn.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/28 21:50:22
MacPhail wrote: Your opponent easily deletes one or more of these in the shooting phase to make a hole for their deep strikers on Turn 2. A 1 in 6 chance for 5 models means somebody probably stands back up, and you could even add another with an AoF on your turn. At worst you force your opponent to allocate another unit's shooting, and at best you buy yourself an extra turn with a secured backfield.
Valorous heart doesn't stand people back up, it's just feel no pain. It means that the minimum firepower required to remove the unit is a little higher but sufficient overkill with still kill them all.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong... do you check FNP per wound suffered or per model lost? In my mind, you take a hit, fail a save, suffer a wound, and then try to ignore it with FNP. One wound models can only suffer one wound, so there's just one to ignore, and only mortal wounds spill onto other models in the unit... where am I going wrong?
It's per damage. Get shot with 1 lascannon and you may have to roll 6 FNP rolls. I ran the FNP conviction for several games and it changed nothing. Most squads are killed by over kill. Great! I save 2 wounds to FNP, but the other 8 wounds still went thru on my 5 girls. They're wiped anyway.
Awesome, thanks for clarifying. I play about 90% of my games with the same 6 guys and we don't get out much, so there are few opportunities to correct little misinterpretations like that.
PuppetSoul wrote: You shouldn't be using Sisters as backfield objective campers, because they don't have long range weapons to make them relevant. For a similar price you can take scouts with snipers.
"I looked, but I sure don't see any scouts with snipers in the sister's dex." -Everyone in this channel trying to make mono sisters work
Yep, this is me. Mono Sisters must be made to work as well as it can and then be reported on. I'll return to allies in good time.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/28 23:31:34
That was my first thought anyway, until I realised that if I ever *was* playing my Sisters against such an army for-reals I would have another 500pts to spend, which would mean Celestine, at least 1 Dialogus, and a Knight Paladin or something similarly nasty to take down the Russes with. There'd also be LoS blocking terrain and far more opportunities to claim cover.
What I'm now wondering is how a mech Sisters army would cope under the same conditions. If I get time over the weekend I'll run a few more test games and let you know.
It goes from wounding on 2s to wounding on 5s, but the returning fire is cut in half, can't use Guidance/Vessels/Blessed Bolts, and the transports never achieve a 2+ except on the first turn.
And they can pop smoke to make hits harder, and can cross the battlefield in one turn rather than three. Plus if you're using any form of AT weapons, you get to actually use them.
That was my first thought anyway, until I realised that if I ever *was* playing my Sisters against such an army for-reals I would have another 500pts to spend, which would mean Celestine, at least 1 Dialogus, and a Knight Paladin or something similarly nasty to take down the Russes with. There'd also be LoS blocking terrain and far more opportunities to claim cover.
What I'm now wondering is how a mech Sisters army would cope under the same conditions. If I get time over the weekend I'll run a few more test games and let you know.
It goes from wounding on 2s to wounding on 5s, but the returning fire is cut in half, can't use Guidance/Vessels/Blessed Bolts, and the transports never achieve a 2+ except on the first turn.
And they can pop smoke to make hits harder, and can cross the battlefield in one turn rather than three. Plus if you're using any form of AT weapons, you get to actually use them.
I think I know this, but having just gotten FNP wrong, I'll clarify: per rules and FAQs, can a tank Advance AND use smoke launchers? Basically, does doing one thing that disallows shooting allow you to do another thing that disallows shooting? And which text should I quote when doing so?
MacPhail wrote: I think I know this, but having just gotten FNP wrong, I'll clarify: per rules and FAQs, can a tank Advance AND use smoke launchers? Basically, does doing one thing that disallows shooting allow you to do another thing that disallows shooting? And which text should I quote when doing so?
There's probably a FAQ but Advance does not remove your shooting phase and occurs in the movement phase. Smoke is giving up your shooting phase. I don't see why not.
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
MacPhail wrote: I think I know this, but having just gotten FNP wrong, I'll clarify: per rules and FAQs, can a tank Advance AND use smoke launchers? Basically, does doing one thing that disallows shooting allow you to do another thing that disallows shooting? And which text should I quote when doing so?
There's probably a FAQ but Advance does not remove your shooting phase and occurs in the movement phase. Smoke is giving up your shooting phase. I don't see why not.
Rulebook FAQ, page 6, column 2.
Q: Can abilities that are used ‘instead of shooting’, such as
Smoke Launchers, be used if the model using them has Fallen
Back, Advanced or has enemy models within 1" of it?
A: Yes. A model can use such an ability so long as it does
not shoot – it does not matter whether this is because the
model cannot shoot or it chooses not to.
Vindicare's doubletap strat is huge, and essentially free. And Assassins are being added as 85pt reserves, so that they can pull in a Vindicare if the enemy has soft targets, and a Callidus or Eversor if they don't.
Here again, I will respect them because you should. I'm not going to anticipate seeing them in every list or even a majority of them. Like a lot of things in 40K, when there is 2,000 points arrayed against you, it is best to assume that lots of things are going to die. The goal isn't to avoid it completely, despite what Papa Nurgle whispers into your ears. The goals are 1) make a list that has not true "head of the snake" to begin with and 2) make sure YOU choose where and when they die as often as possible through clever deployment and use of terrain.
But no one can stop everything all the time and you just have to have a plan B and C. That's just life. I love snipers, I recommend snipers but at the end of the day, I just need one more point than you've got.
Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and then crush him.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com
MacPhail wrote: I think I know this, but having just gotten FNP wrong, I'll clarify: per rules and FAQs, can a tank Advance AND use smoke launchers? Basically, does doing one thing that disallows shooting allow you to do another thing that disallows shooting? And which text should I quote when doing so?
There's probably a FAQ but Advance does not remove your shooting phase and occurs in the movement phase. Smoke is giving up your shooting phase. I don't see why not.
Rulebook FAQ, page 6, column 2.
Q: Can abilities that are used ‘instead of shooting’, such as
Smoke Launchers, be used if the model using them has Fallen
Back, Advanced or has enemy models within 1" of it?
A: Yes. A model can use such an ability so long as it does
not shoot – it does not matter whether this is because the
model cannot shoot or it chooses not to.
Thanks, I was being lazy.
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
Also, I'm not saying you weren't successful, I'm just saying that those two books (Blackbook 3rd and C:WD 2011) were objectively worse with fewer options than this codex.
I wish I could agree, but I had a LOT of fun with that Witch Hunters codex. I was able to win SO MUCH with it. I never understood people saying it was "lowest tier evah" and that's what people DID say about it. Well not my opponents i assure you but everyone else pretty much agreed with you.
I think the truth of that codex was that in a time when massed Assault Cannons and really assault in general (Pac-Man mechanic back then was just brutal) were king, 70% of people were playing Space Marines and literally no one else even had Battle Sisters, or saw it played... Yet they all had an opinion. It got more derision than even the Tau Codex at the time! That's gotta' be some kind of record. People would own a Tau army for a cup of coffee and they'd be on sale the next month. i got a lot of deals on Tau. Hehehe.
I'm therefore not surprised when people say this kind of thing. I just didn't agree. And all I can do is base how good it is on how good I made it.
Likewise, the new Beta Bolter rule combined with the formation causes even a single set of Intercessors to rip through multiple squads of girls each turn at 30", so massed 3+/4++ does effectively nothing when the meta is built around 2+/3++ being the new standard for elites.
what do you mean by "the formation"
//edit, oh the specialist detachment for incessors
Also i didnt write that. I was responding TO it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/03/01 19:50:24
Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and then crush him.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com
Also, I'm not saying you weren't successful, I'm just saying that those two books (Blackbook 3rd and C:WD 2011) were objectively worse with fewer options than this codex.
I wish I could agree, but I had a LOT of fun with that Witch Hunters codex. I was able to win SO MUCH with it. I never understood people saying it was "lowest tier evah" and that's what people DID say about it. Well not my opponents i assure you but everyone else pretty much agreed with you.
DUDE. I'm not talking about Codex: Witchhunters. I said that and I pasted exactly what I'm talking about. I'm talking about Blackbook 3rd (the main rulebook) and Codex White Dwarf 2011.
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
Also, I'm not saying you weren't successful, I'm just saying that those two books (Blackbook 3rd and C:WD 2011) were objectively worse with fewer options than this codex.
I wish I could agree, but I had a LOT of fun with that Witch Hunters codex. I was able to win SO MUCH with it. I never understood people saying it was "lowest tier evah" and that's what people DID say about it. Well not my opponents i assure you but everyone else pretty much agreed with you.
DUDE. I'm not talking about Codex: Witchhunters. I said that and I pasted exactly what I'm talking about. I'm talking about Blackbook 3rd (the main rulebook) and Codex White Dwarf 2011.
I dont agree about the white dwarf. Ive said so. I confused the issue by using the wrong name but my point is, in the time i have played them, 2005 forward, ive not struggled like I have w this version.
I have totally disassembled the army and re-assembled it into a very circa 4E rendition and it is proving far easier to play. Its also proving to be a lot slower to deploy but i'm getting better at it. Its just so much slower on paper than it was. An unpleasant change. Not insurmountable.
Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and then crush him.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com
Jancoran wrote: I have totally disassembled the army and re-assembled it into a very circa 4E rendition and it is proving far easier to play. Its also proving to be a lot slower to deploy but i'm getting better at it. Its just so much slower on paper than it was. An unpleasant change. Not insurmountable.
I've been saying that mixed mech is the way to go. It's easier to deploy and still has the tools to do what needs to be done. I'm not sure if that's 4E (the edition I skipped), but that's what I play. As long as you don't play foot sisters (which seems like way too much metal to deploy and play in any normal length of time), you should be fine.
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
Jancoran wrote: I have totally disassembled the army and re-assembled it into a very circa 4E rendition and it is proving far easier to play. Its also proving to be a lot slower to deploy but i'm getting better at it. Its just so much slower on paper than it was. An unpleasant change. Not insurmountable.
I've been saying that mixed mech is the way to go. It's easier to deploy and still has the tools to do what needs to be done. I'm not sure if that's 4E (the edition I skipped), but that's what I play. As long as you don't play foot sisters (which seems like way too much metal to deploy and play in any normal length of time), you should be fine.
Ironically...im playing 3 exorcists aaaaaaand...sisters.
Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and then crush him.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com
The list was not optimal on points as I wanted to be WYSIWYG as much as possible and I am short on stormbolter models. Nonetheless my strategy was to keep my core together for a 4++ bubble and move from there.
My game was against an IG Catachan player with a pretty standard tank list. 2 x Leman Russes, 2 x Baslisks. Some sentinels, a hellhound, ogryns, bullgryns and plenty of bodies.
My opponent had placed the table before I got to the store and there was a lot of LOS blocking terrain mid-table which should have been good for his artillerie. However I lucked out and got to chose my side of the table. I had an objective advantage and knew he'd have to come to me.
I used the terrain to my advance and blocked LOS and forced him into a combat where I tied most of his units.
Things that worked well:
-Ebon Chalice Imagifier - I had to keep her out of sniper LOS since she was my vessel splasher. Turn one she did +1 to hit and got me a solid shooting phase that killed a hellhound, a sentinel and gutted a few guard squads. Turn 2 everything moved +3 inches to stay mostly out of LOS. Turn 3 everything fought twice, after charging, and decimated his infantry units.
-Seraphims - I used their stratagem twice, it was ok, but they did not have any optimal targets. They acted as a solid thread to his basilisk and leman russes however as he had to focus them down or risk getting tied. I dropped them on turn 2 and 3 and was able to keep the pressure up. Second squad even managed a charge on a sentinel and piled into a leman russ mitigating his shooting for a turn. They did their job.
-Repentias - Kept their ride out of LOS and moved them center of the board. This gave them optimal threat capacity and their charge turn 3 was devastating. They got to fight twice at 4 attacks each. Supported by sisters and a few characters they cleaned 5 bullgryns, 4 ogryns, a command squad, 5 rattlings and several guardsmans. I was really happy with them. Second time fielding them and they obliterate anything they touch if you go twice with them. Make sure to multicharge units that cannot overwatch back to maximize their potential.
I need to work on optimizing points and unit composition, but this was still a fun game.
Things I would change:
Repentia stratagem. The mortal wounds are near useless since they generally overkill what they touch. Besides they have so much potential, you do not want them dying in close combat. Give them a stratagem where they can get a 4+ feel no point until their next turn and I will spend that command point every time instead.
Spirit of the martyr - Its ok, but would be better if you could use at any point during your movement phase. I would like to be able to vessel this one and possibly heal multiple units, tanks etc. The restrictions on movement however means you're rarely in a good position to use this one.
Command Points VS Faith points. - I ended the game with 0 CP, but still had 2 FPs left by the end. I would allow Sacred Rites to work both ways while your warlord is alive. Transforming a FP into a CP and vice versa would give a lot more tactical flexibility. I cannot see that stratagem ever being used otherwise.
Vessel is a crutch of a stratagem. Too much works around it. Why not scale it from the Faith Points themselves? 1 FP and you get to target a unit, spend 2 FP and you get a 3 inch bubble around the unit and for 3 FP you get a 6 inch bubble cascading act of faith? It would give value to have more faith points and make some order convictions and Sacred Rites much more interesting.
The rules team are looking to rebuild the Acts of Faith system from the ground up to ensure they are both more reliable, and can be used to impact key moments in the battle – just as acts of divine intervention should.
I’m looking forward to the final codex now. It’s good to know they’re listening.
I'm the owner of The WAAAGH Studios, a commission painting service. If you have any commission work you'd like doing don't hesitate to message me or check out
- 
- 
- 
- 
